End Retroactive Rulemaking and Protect Patient Choice

——————————

A Virginia physical therapist was suspended for more than four years despite:

• no criminal conduct,
• no patient harm,
• documented informed consent,
• positive patient outcomes,
• expert testimony supporting the care, and
• more than 300 patient statements supporting treatment.

The Virginia Board of Physical Therapy later found:

✅SAFE AND COMPETENT

✅NO VIOLATIONS FOUND

✅NO PATIENT HARM FOUND

Yet indefinite restrictions remained anyway.

Same record.
Same facts.
Different outcome.

That contradiction is the issue raised by this petition.

For more than 20 years, I treated patients across Virginia with zero prior complaints and more than 110,000 patient treatments. Patients voluntarily sought care, reported benefit, and wanted to continue treatment.

Yet despite no findings of patient harm or violations, the restrictions remained.

No government agency should be able to destroy a career while simultaneously 

finding:

• no violations,
• no patient harm, and
• competence to practice.

Then no clinician’s professional judgment and no patient’s right to choose care is truly secure.

——————————

THIS IS NOT ABOUT ELIMINATING PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS 

This petition is about whether government agencies may:

• reinterpret undefined standards after the fact,
• impose discipline untethered from evidence, and
• maintain severe restrictions even when contradictory evidence was never meaningfully reconciled.

Because once evidence no longer constrains government power, outcomes stop depending on facts.

They depend on who holds the power.

——————————

WHAT HAPPENED

Despite:

• Documented informed consent
• Sworn testimony confirming informed consent
• Contemporaneous medical records documenting informed consent
• Positive patient outcomes
• Treatment methods commonly taught throughout mainstream physical therapy education  
• Unrebutted expert testimony from the only qualified pelvic rehabilitation specialist who reviewed the case (Dr. Holly Tanner) supporting the treatment, and
• No complaints from any patient who actually received the pelvic floor therapy in question

I still received:

• A suspension exceeding four years
• Indefinite probation
• Permanent restrictions
• National reporting
• Severe professional and reputational damage
• The loss of the livelihood I spent decades building

The evidentiary record never materially changed.

Yet the outcome did.

——————————

THIS IS ABOUT YOUR RIGHT TO CHOOSE CARE

The Board’s indefinite restrictions include a mandatory “chaperone” requirement that competent adult patients cannot decline, even when those same patients:

• Successfully received the same treatment before
• Want to continue the care voluntarily
• Are fully capable of informed consent

Adult patients who wanted to continue successful treatment lost the ability to make that decision for themselves.

The Board has never clearly defined in any published regulations:

• what legally constitutes “pelvic floor therapy,”
• what legally qualifies as a “chaperone,”
• when a chaperone is required, or
• why informed competent adult patients cannot waive this requirement. 

Patients who voluntarily sought treatment and reported benefit were suddenly told they could no longer continue that care without government-imposed restrictions.

This is no longer just about provider discipline.

It is about whether government agencies may override informed adult patient choice without clearly published standards and without evidence of patient harm.

——————————

WHY THIS MATTERS

This issue extends far beyond one provider or one specialty area.

Physical therapists across orthopedic, neurological, sports, and manual therapy settings routinely use whole-body evaluation and regional interdependence principles taught throughout mainstream physical therapy education.

If regulators can retroactively reinterpret accepted clinical practices without clear standards, uncertainty spreads across the entire profession.

Clinicians cannot safely comply with standards that are never clearly defined.

The consequences also affect patient access to care.

Pelvic floor therapy is already difficult to access in many communities because of:

• provider shortages,
• long wait times,
• geographic limitations,
• poor insurance reimbursement, and
• limited specialist availability.

Undefined staffing mandates and indefinite restrictions will discourage providers from offering these services and reduce access for the patients who need them most.

That should concern every licensed professional and every patient who depends upon one.

——————————

WHAT WE ARE ASKING FOR 

We call on the Virginia General Assembly, Governor Abigail Spanberger, and the Department of Health Professions to:

1. Require evidence of patient harm before imposing or maintaining severe restrictions.
2. Require clear, publicly adopted standards (through the Administrative Process Act) before accepted clinical practices may later be reinterpreted as misconduct.
3. Protect informed adult patient choice, including the ability to voluntarily accept or decline chaperone requirements.
4. Require meaningful consideration of medical records, expert testimony, patient outcomes, and contradictory evidence in disciplinary proceedings.
5. End retroactive rulemaking and selective enforcement against clinicians practicing according to accepted professional education and standards.

Professional regulation must remain evidence-based, transparent, predictable, and tied to clearly published standards.

——————————

FINAL POINT

This case did not involve criminal conduct, proven patient harm, or final findings of violations.

Yet severe, indefinite restrictions remained anyway.

✅SAFE AND COMPETENT

✅NO VIOLATIONS FOUND

✅NO PATIENT HARM FOUND

If you believe government agencies should not be allowed to impose indefinite punishment without violations, patient harm, or clearly defined standards, sign and share this petition.

——————————

TAKE ACTION - PROTECT PATIENT CHOICE

• SIGN this petition to demand evidence-based regulation, transparent standards, accountability, and protection for informed patient choice.. 
• SHARE it with patients, physical therapists, women’s health advocates, and anyone who values medical freedom.

Scott Roberts, PT, LMT

Virginia